You're forgetting one thing
 

That's marxism, not socialism. Based on Marx's theory, a socialist system would best implement the proper outcome. But one can get to socialism without marx's labor theory of value (which derives from Smith, so hardly uniquely supports socialism).

You're forgetting one thing
 

Yes, I am, as a parent, honestly suggesting that the government should, on the off chance that my estate has a value in excess of a couple million, take a slice of that excess. That's the one thing you guys keep forgetting -- the slim chance that you will die with taxable estates, even without a slick lawyer doing any planning for you.

And the Americabn Dream is supposed to be that one worls hard so that his kids will have more chances to succeed than he did. It is most certainly not that his children shouldn't have to work hard to be successful, too.

As Andrew Carnegie said, the man who dies rich dies disgraced. But then, I suppose somebody's going to suggest that the old robber baron must have been a socialist.

You're forgetting one thing
 

Marx was a socialist. And I never suggested that a labor theory of value is uniquely socialist. In fact, I'm the one who has been consistently arguing that the assertion that an estate tax, whether as an excise on the transfer of wealth or as a means of wealth redistribution, isn't socialist.

Up until now, I've been fairly polite about it. But, since people want to keep pushing the issue and using it as a straw man, let me sugggest that anybosy who truly thinks that the estate tax is socialism is a buffoon and completely ignorant of the principles underlying tax policy as well as socialism.

You're forgetting one thing
 

1. You couched this in terms of moral imperatives, then use English common law as the supporting authority? God Save the Queen, indeed. English common law ain't the fount of all morality. My logical basis is simple - its your family's money. Families have rights to keep property within them. Its a ludicrous liberal's fantasy that we all live as one unified family, and Mother Government beneficially oversees property rights for us.

2. Agreed.

3. That argument presumes that the money being transferred to the heir has not yet been taxed. It has. I think you should be able to transfer whatever you like between family members tax free. The law should allow that, so families can take care of themselves. If you allow families to keep swaths of money in their coffers, those are families who won't be hitting up the govt for benefits. But we can't try leaving money in private hands, can we? No, that cheats Mother Govt out of her bridge toll, and all the people who demand wealth redistribution out of their handouts.

4. Nonsense. If you get a big lump of change, you can buy all sorts of kooky consumer goods - helping the economy - while not even touching principal. The govt, OTOH, squanders all of it, and quickly. You can't make any coherent economic argument for giving money that would be spent in the private sector to the govt.

5. You're "institutionalized." You've been reading too many books on tax for too long and are beginning to think that the tax system (which has not always been as progressive as it is today) is carved in stone, handed to us by God himself. Nonsense. That a thing's been done wrong and badly for a while doesn't mean changing it is heresy or an inherently unsound proposition. You're wearing blinders on this issue because you're too close to it too often. You sound like me when I cross examine my wife. I rip her points to ribbons when we argue, and then she just looks at me and says "Stop fucking lawyering me. In the real world, you know I'm right."

Its ok. Most lawyers are fucking deluded. We're so twisted up in the belief that what we're involved in is the perfect logical system, and that its RIGHT, that we don't even realize how fucking blind we are.

Nobody likes paying taxes. Most adults understand that everyone feels this way. If you object to paying taxes, move to Somalia, or find people to vote for who will spend less government money.

You're forgetting one thing
 

Where did you get this idea?

You're forgetting one thing
 

No, I'm calling your justification socialist. Your justification is, unless I misunderstand you is:

1) The state creates and enforces property rights. Without the state there would be no property rights.
2) Because the state creates property rights, the state may claim from a person whatever property is wishes.
3) The estate tax claims a reasonable amount of property from a decedent. Because it is less than everything, an amount the state could reasonably take, it is perforce reasonable.

Step 2 is socialism, if not something more than that.

You're forgetting one thing
 

I don't think there is enough liquor in the world to keep me at a cocktail party where this conversation is happening.*


*(Unless, of course, it degenerates into fisticuffs.)

You're forgetting one thing
 

Actually, it was you who originally couched it in terms of moral imperatives.

If by institutionalized, you mean that I agree that the tax system should be progressive, you're right. To the extent that the system is done badly, it's because of too many people trying to avoid their obligations and seeking special breaks for themselves.

We all derive benefits from the government and we all need to pay for them. Beyond that, we're the richest nation on the planet. I believe it's simply unacceptable that there are people in America who go to bed each night hungry. I believe that people who have more than enough should be expected to pony up a bit so that they don't have to go to bed hungry. Holmes called it the price of civilzation.

And at this point, I've come full circle yet again. We recycle this whole debate every few months and every few months I say the same things. You say the same things. Club says the same things. And Hank just sits in the corner of the cage and throws shit at the rest of us. I'm pretty sure I've played my part.

So, until next time....

You're forgetting one thing
 

2. And I'm done with having my name associated with it. Ty- please change the thread title to

"Arguing Tax Policy in An attempt to bridge the Yawning divide."

You're forgetting one thing
 

And I'm on moratorium because of little Max- update Peanut had grade 1 cancer in one tumor but they think they got it all.

You're forgetting one thing
 

How did you make it through law school?

You're forgetting one thing
 

There was more liquor then.

You're forgetting one thing
 

No. My argument is this (and this is really going to be the end of it for me.

1. Government requires a certain amount of revenue to function.

2. Since it requires a given amount of revenue, it is more sensible and equitable to take a portion of that revenue from dead people with very large amounts of wealth, since that means the government can then take less from living people who need to use the money they earn to live.

3. Those who claim that the estate tax is socialism and unjust are ignoring the fact that it has been around for as long as property rights, or they are dissembling because to argue socialism isounds better than saying "we're rich, fuck you."

4. All I'm doing is calling bullshit on the people who say that the estate tax is socialism. That, and saying to them as well "fuck me, buddy? Fuck you."

You're forgetting one thing
 

I'm happy for you and Peanut. I'll keep him in my prayers.